More on Boyd & Beyond II and Boydian Theory
Adds the original page numbers, which may seem a little odd because for readability this edition spreads several of Boyd’s originals over two or even three pages. All of these will have the same number.
We are wired to crave and be attracted to novelty, it sets us thinking and generates insights and stimulates our creativity.
Page 2 of 2 | Previous page
J.ScottShipman:
October 19th, 2011 at 7:51 pm
Hi Zen,
.
Two good posts!
.
"We are wired to crave and be attracted to novelty…" is the antithesis of most modern, process/policy driven training. Lucien’s point is well-taken on developing autodidactic sailors, but it wasn’t so long ago our sailors were known for their independent thinking—this wasn’t the result of a deterministic program as much as a reflection of life onboard ship—which demanded creativity and innovation. Technology and meta-culture have both retarded this cultural attribute, based on anecdotal evidence I’ve been collecting since the mid 90’s.
.
We have a Fleet of very smart guys, but in a culture where political correctness often goes to the extreme (mandatory training in human trafficking, for just one example). I’ve often called this the Oprahfication of the navy—where adherence to political correctness is considered essential. Sadly, during the B&B 2012 conference, we learned even the USMC is suffering from what I called, "helicopter Gunny Sergeants"—where young Marines aren’t allowed to fail because there is someone there to bail them out and the processes necessary for routine admin have become impossible–defying common sense. Our grossly inefficient defense bureaucracy doesn’t help—as many, if not most of the training/admin requirements emerge from the Pentagon. Lots of well-intentioned people, perhaps, but the cumulative affect is having an operational cost.
.
Developing and nurturing creativity and independent thinking is probably not possible in DoD’s current cultural environment—there will always be a few renegades like John Boyd, but we don’t have enough of them, and I’m not sure if we had a thousand “clones” of Boyd we could overcome the bureaucracy….that said: WE MUST TRY!
Lynn Wheeler:
October 19th, 2011 at 9:25 pm
Boyd use to say that he ranked the naval academy high above the other military academies. However, at recent academy conference they talked about not teaching sufficient critical thinking skills … partially blaming it on Rickover and influence to turn out large numbers in STEM (claim was over 80% in the 80s … but down nearer 60% now). This is in contrast to general educational system where they would like to see a big increase in STEM graduates (viewed as necessary for technology innovation that the country so desperately needs). For some time in silicon valley, one of the holy grails was STEM graduate that then got an MBA … however, the MBA “culture” has also been blamed for many of the country’s problems.
Part of it may be some myth that scientists/engineers won’t question the status quo … which can create some huge ambiguity … rigid hierarchical institutions that want innovation but limited to specifically “politically acceptable” areas. I’m also don’t see the incompatibility between STEM and critical thinking skills. There may be something implicit that since the government has outsourced so much technical innovation … that it isn’t actually required in the services.
J.ScottShipman:
October 19th, 2011 at 10:07 pm
Lynn,
.
You make an excellent point. Once DoD decided to create a homogenized "acquisition expert" the requirement for deep technical knowledge on the part of the government guys began to erode. A dumb customer can easily be fooled by the unscrupulous—one reason our defense budget is so out of control. Our acquisition guys know their bureaucratic role and their process, and go to lots of meetings—but the technical depth is, all too often, lacking.